Exposing!! The Corrupt Counterfeit (NIV) Bible, Verses That Have Been Tamped With!!

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

Mss, mss, mss everywhere:

John 5:4

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+5:4&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/5/#v43005004

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

​

P66, P75, Aleph (Sinaiticus), B (Vaticanus), C*, D, W-suppl, 0125, 0141, pc, d, flg, Vulgate-pt, Curetonian, Bohairic-pt, ach2, Armenian-mss​

Here is the vast extant literature which has the text in it:

"... A,C-3, E, F, G, H, K, L, M, (S*), U, V, X-comm​

Gamma, Delta, Theta, Lambda, Psi​

047, 063, 078​

Cursives: MAJORITY, fam 1,13​

Old Latin: a, aur, b, c, e, ff2, g1, , j, r1, Vulgate​

Syriac: Pes.hitta, Harclean, Palestinian​

Coptic: Bohairic-pt​

Armenian, Ethiopic​

​

Also extant in Y, Omega, 055, 0211, 0233? ...​

​

Tertullian (c. 200) refers to the passage and Tatian (c. 175) placed it in his Diatessaron. ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, page 102​

Additionally:

"... TAITIAN, Diatessaron (I 10:77)​

TERTULLIAN, Baptism (I 3:671,672)​

GREGORY OF NAZIANZEN, Orations (III 7:372)​

AMBROSE, Mysteries (III 10:320)​

​

The index of the ANPF do not show any pre-400 AD Father quoting John 5:2,5 with the disputed portion omitted. There are no references to 5:2. There are four references in the Ante-Nicene volumes to 5:5. These are 1:393, 6:395, 8:419,428. ..." - Early Church Fathers and the Authorized Verson, by Jack Moorman, page 48​

​

Additionally:

​

"... Verse 4 is found (with variations) in uncials A, C3, K, L, Pi, X comm, Delta, Theta, Psi, 047, 063, 078, cursives 28, 565, 700, 892, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1241, 1242, 1253, 1344, 1365, 1546, 1646,2148, 2174, Byzantine majority text and Lectionaries, Old Latin a (4th c), aur (7th), b (5th), c (12/13th), e (5th), f12 (5th),j (6th), rl (7th), the Syriac (Harkelian, Peshitta, Philoxenian, 3rd- 7th c), some manuscripts of the Coptic-Bohairic, the Armenian version; Diatessaron a, e arm, 1, n; Tertullian (220 AD), Ambrose (397 AD), Didymus (398 AD), Chrysostom (407 AD), Cyril (444 AD).​

​

Ruckman (2) p 217, states that the Diatessaron copies (2nd century) attesting to the passage number over 200. Ruckman, ibid and Hills (3) p 146, (38) p 122, state that the passage is virtually intact in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts. See Fuller (33) p 157-8. Berry's Greek text supports this passage. ..." - http://ecclesia.org/truth/manuscript_evidence.html​

Additionally:

"... Even the recent Nestle-Aland 27th edition critical text acknowledges that verse four is found in the Majority of all Greek manuscripts, the Old Latin, the Vulgate Clementine, the Syriac Peshitta and Harkelian, and in some copies of the Coptic Boharic ancient versions.​

​

As for Robertson’s codex C, it was amended to now agree with the reading found in the King James Bible, and the codex D he mentions retains the words Robertson would have us omit from verse three. Robertson’s “oldest and best manuscripts” can’t even agree among themselves. ..." - https://brandplucked.webs.com/john534troubling.htm​

 

[WithinReason]

So my advice is to learn about manuscripts.

I hope to have shown to have taken such advice, even so long ago:

John 7:53-8:11

The NIV and NWT follow the same pattern:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+7:53&version=NIV

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/7/#v43007052

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

P66, P75, Aleph (Sinaiticus), A (Alexandrinus), B (Vaticanus), C, L, N, T, W, X, Y, Delta, Theta, Psi, 0141, 0211, al, a, b-c, f, l*, q, pesh, sin, cur, sa, bo-pt, pbo, ach2, Goth, Arm​

Here is the vast extant literature which has the text in it:

"... D, E, (F*), G, H, K, M, S, T, U​

Gamma, Lambda, Pi​

Cursives: MAJORITY, (fam 1,13, both misplace)​

Old Latin: aur, b*, c, d, e, ff2, j, g1, l-mg, r1, Vulgate​

Syriac: Harclean-mg, Palestinian​

Coptic: Bohairic-pt​

Armenian-usc, Ethiopic​

​

Also extant in Omega, 047, 055, 0233? ...​

​

... The statement of Augustin (c. 400) is well known: "Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who had said 'sin no more' had granted permission to sin." ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, page 105​

Additionally:

"... Apostolic Constitutions (I 7:408), refers to the account and quotes 8:11. ... There is no indication in ANPF of a pre-400 AD Father omitting the disputed portion by joining 7:52 directly to 8:12. ..." - Early Church Fathers and the Authorized Version, by Jack Moorman, page 49​

Additionally:

"... found in over 900 manuscripts. ...​

​

... Fuller (4) p 1234, (33) p 155, cites Burgon as stating that of 73 copies of John's Gospel in the British Museum, 61 contain John 7:53-8:11 as found in this passage. Burgon (33) p 155, indicates that this proportioning would be typical for any collection of manuscript copies of John. He also cites, (33) p 149, a further 60 copies, from three distinct lines of ancestry, which agree with this passage. He alludes to 35 of the BM copies which contain a marginal note stating that verses 1-11 are not to be read on Whitsunday. Thus he explains how the Lectionary practice of the early church would have accounted for the omission of the verses from some of the seventy cursives from which they are absent. He also states, (33) p 148, that the subject matter itself would have been sufficient for deletion of the words from many copies, including the oldest uncials, Aleph and B. The verses are also absent from A (5th century), L (8th century), T (5th century) and Delta (9th century) but Codex A has two leaves missing, which in Burgon's considered view would have contained the verses, while L and Delta exhibit blank spaces which are witnesses FOR, not against, the validity of the verses. See remarks on B in relation to Mark 16:9-20. This leaves only T in agreement with Aleph and B, both notoriously untrustworthy. Burgon, ibid p 156, states that the verses are to be found in the large majority of later copies (i.e. over 900 manuscripts, as the NKJV so obligingly notes.)​

​

Hills (3) p 159, (38) p 131, states that Papyri 66 and 75 and W omit the verses, in addition to the sources cited by Burgon. D however (6th century), contains them. Burgon (33) p 145-6, 1534, also cites in favour of the passage as found in this passage: Codex D and the Old Latin codices b, c, e ff, g, h, j-see notes under John 5:3b-4 for dates. Note that the Old Latin TEXT dates from the 2nd Century, (17) p77 Jerome (385 AD), who included it in the Vulgate after surveying older Greek copies, stating it was found "in many copies both Greek and Latin", before 415 AD, (17) p 134 The Ethiopic (5th century), Palestinian Syriac (5th Century), Georgian (5/6th century), some copies of the Armenian (4/5th century), Slavonic, Arabic and Persian versions Ambrose (374 AD), Augustine (396), Chrysologus (433), Faustus (400), Gelasius (492), Pacian (370), Rufinus (400), Sedulius (434), Victorius (457), Vigilius (484) and others The Lectionary practice of the Eastern Church, from earliest times (i.e. the 2nd century.)​

​

Burgon, ibid p 147, states that the dislocation of John 7:53-8:11 (see notes under RSV and GN) is attributable to four cursives, 13, 69, 124, 346, all evidently from one ancient and corrupt copy.​

​

Ruckman (2) p 134, cites in favour of the passage, the Didache (3rd century document of Apostolic Teachings), Apostolic Constitutions (4th century) and Eusebius (324 AD) citing Papias (150 AD) as recognizing the passage. The Montanists (2nd century) were also aware of the passage. Ruckman (31) p 333, also cites besides D, uncials M, S and Gamma from the 5th, 8th and 9th centuries in favour of this passage. Concerning authorship of the passage (see note under JB), Hills (38) p 130, states that "arguments from style are notoriously weak." Berry's Greek text supports this passage. ..." - http://ecclesia.org/truth/manuscript_evidence.html​

​

Additionally:

"... in the writings of the Church Fathers: Didascalia, Ambrosiaster, Apostolic Constitutions, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.​

​

Jerome (AD 340-420), the translator of the Latin Bible called the Vulgate, said this about the pericope de adultera: “. . . in the Gospel according to John IN MANY MANUSCRIPTS, BOTH GREEK AND LATIN, IS FOUND THE STORY OF THE ADULTEROUS WOMAN who was accused before the Lord.” Jerome considered the pericope genuine, and included it in his Vulgate. ..." - https://brandplucked.webs.com/john753811.htm​

 

[SpiritDove05]

Did they deliberately delete some word?

yes!! words, sentences and complete paragraphs in order 2 twist the word 2 ultimately stop people from being saved, written by the antichrist movement!!

 

[massorite]

Has it occurred to you that Strong used the KJV to develop his concordance? Why would you use a KJV concordance for a different translation? That's just foolish. You use G&K for the NIV.

Think through your argument before posting it next time.


Claims of corruption are not evidence.

I don't need to think through my argument. You need to read all of what I posted and by the way. You should do a little research before you post.
I stated that I found that the NIV is so corrupted that they had to produce a new Strongs Concordance to match the NIV because you can't use the original.
The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance (Strongest Strong's)
by Edward W. Goodrick (Author), John R. Kohlenberger III (Author)

Only one New International Version concordance provides an exhaustive indexing of every appearance of every word in the NIV Bible: The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance. It also offers complete access to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek from which the NIV was translated. Feature for feature, this Gold Medallion Award-winning volume is by far the most powerful NIV concordance available. Features •Complete alphabetical listings for every word in the NIV •Thorough dictionary-indexes define every Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek word in the Bible, including the possible meaning of every proper name •Exhaustive listing of every NIV translation for a given word; all related words shown in the original languages •All references listed in biblical order •All words cross-referenced to spelling variations and variant forms •More than 2,000 key words from the KJV cross-referenced to their NIV equivalents •Special typefaces indicate the word or words used in the NIV translation for all Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek terms •Unique numbering system developed by Goodrick and Kohlenberger (G/K) eliminates the inherent gaps, flaws, and inaccuracies of the old Strong’s numbering system •Special indexes allow for easy cross-referencing between the G/K numbering system for those using reference books keyed to Strong’s numbers

Mr. Goodrick and Mr. Kohlen took the Strong's. claimed that there are inherent gaps, flaws, and inaccuracies of the old Strong’s numbering system and rewrote it to fit the NIV bible because before they created their concordance there wasn't a good bible dictionary to study from if you were reading from the NIV. So they are literally putting down one of the greatest Bible Dictionaries ever put together so they can sell a version of the bible that is so corrupted that the original Strong's can't be used to help a student of the Word of God do any research to better understand the Word of God.
You should get your facts straight before you post.

 

[Lightskin]

Here’s Verse comparisons between the (KJV) bible and the faulty (NIV) bible.


(KJV)
Matthew 17:21
However, this kind does not
go out except by prayer
and fasting.

(NIV)
Matthew 17:21
ooopppss!! Zilch!! Whole verse
missing, why???

Here we see an entire verse missing from the NIV, why would you remove an entire verse out of the bible?
Perhaps the writers are trying 2 hide something? Looks very suspicious 2 me!! Bible says in deu 4:2 you
shall not add nor detract from the word of God.

(KJV)
Mark 9:29
And he said unto them, This kind
can come forth by nothing, but
by prayer and fasting.

(NIV)
Mark 9:29
He replied, “This kind can come out only by prayer.

Now this is the time in the bible where the apostles in the bible couldnt cast a demon out of a child
and then jesus came and cast it out of the child and the apostles then said 2 him how come we couldnt
cast the demon out of the child and he said 2 them dis kind comes out by prayer and (fasting). Now in
the (KJV) it also says prayer and (fasting) but in the (NIV) it says prayer only, why is dis?

If you look at all through out history monks, preists and other types of religious people would fast
mortify their flesh and 2 strenghen themselves spirituly so that it wud be easyer for them 2 open
themselves up 2 the spiritual relm and 2 communicate with God more effectivly without any interference
from any demonic forces then a person can perceive Gods word better.

When we fast we de-clutter our bodies and detoxify ourselves and drain away impurities from our systems
which hence frees up our minds and also allows the holy spirit 2 move through us more easily.

Fasting is quite a big part of christianity and walking in the spirit and also quite a big part of
deliverence ministry, jesus also said we must deny our flesh, Matthew 16:24 so why has the (NIV)
taken this out of the verse? its quite an important element. it raises alot of questions?

(KJV)
Romans 8:1
There is therefore now no condemnation to
them which are in Christ Jesus, (who walk
not after the flesh, but after the Spirit).

(NIV)
Romans 8:1
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those
who are in Christ Jesus,

See the difference? wheres the 2nd part of the verse in the (NIV) version? Well lets look at the 1st
part. (There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus). what does it mean
2 be in christ? does it mean 2 believe in him? well even the demons believe and tremble james 2:19.
does it mean 2 follow christ? well 2 follow jesus is 2 deny urself and take up ur cross stated again
in Matthew 16:24. or does it mean 2 walk as christ walked?

well the bible clearly shows that jesus walked in the spirit. Romans 8:8 Those controlled by the
flesh cannot please God. and we know that jesus pleased the father Matthew 17:5 "This is my beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him".and john 8:29 the father have not left me alone coz
i always do the things dat please him.

therefore we can conclude dat being in christ is 2 be in the spirit as he was, we must worship God
in spirit and in truth john 4:24 also pauls main enphesis through out the NT is to be born again
(circumcised in the heart) and 2 be in the spirit!! gal 5:16.

alot of people are being misslead by a tampering of the word and think their ok with God as long
as they just believe in christ without any form of repentence which is very evident in ur
avarage (so called christian) 2day! hence leaving dem with the idea dat they can also (sin) but
call on jesus and its ok! its because of deception like dis dat many people are dammed and on their
way 2 hell unfortunetly Matthew 7:13

(KJV)
Romans 10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and
hearing by the word of God

(NIV)
Romans 10:17
Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message,
and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

here we have 2 completley different paragraphs."faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"
how does a person get saved? dont they have 2 hear the word!! and wat is the bible? isnt it Gods word?
and isnt jesus christ the word dat became flesh? so dat would make the bible all about christ!! so
why does the (NIV) say " hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ".

so wats dis so called message dat the (NIV) is talking about? i cant find it, i mean there are tones
of messages in the bible anyway, some of dem are prophecys of jesus christ!! some are parables and
some are just some other prophetic talk.

Anyway faith doesnt come by "hearing the message" faith comes by hearing the gospel which is the
(good news) and the whole word of God which is the bible. so once again another twisting of the
scriptures again!!

The Holy Spirit who guides the prayerful reader is not bound by any one single version of Scripture. You lack faith in the power of God.

 

[WithinReason]

The Holy Spirit who guides the prayerful reader is not bound by any one single version of Scripture.

It is not the premise of the OP, nor myself, that the Holy Ghost ever was so (Straw man). The premise is about the errors (additions, deletions, etc) in the NIV, compared to the faithful and inspired word of God, preserved into the English, the KJB.

 

[John146]

Agreed. This is a bible discussion forum, so shouldn’t we discuss the Bible? In order for us to discuss the Bible, we need to have the pure words of God in bible form. We cannot discuss the Bible using the NIV because it’s not the pure words of God. It has mixture of unclean things. Thanks for not backing down.

You can show them all the mss evidence in the world, but I think it comes down to faith. Do we really believe God gave His word, commanded us to live by every word and not perfectly preserve His word for us to live by today?

 

[John146]

The Holy Spirit who guides the prayerful reader is not bound by any one single version of Scripture. You lack faith in the power of God.

We must have the right words in order for the Holy Spirit to guide us to the truth. And yes, the Holy Spirit is bound by His word.

 

[Dino246]

I don't need to think through my argument. You need to read all of what I posted and by the way. You should do a little research before you post.
I stated that I found that the NIV is so corrupted that they had to produce a new Strongs Concordance to match the NIV because you can't use the original.
The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance (Strongest Strong's)
by Edward W. Goodrick (Author), John R. Kohlenberger III (Author)

Only one New International Version concordance provides an exhaustive indexing of every appearance of every word in the NIV Bible: The Strongest NIV Exhaustive Concordance. It also offers complete access to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek from which the NIV was translated. Feature for feature, this Gold Medallion Award-winning volume is by far the most powerful NIV concordance available. Features •Complete alphabetical listings for every word in the NIV •Thorough dictionary-indexes define every Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek word in the Bible, including the possible meaning of every proper name •Exhaustive listing of every NIV translation for a given word; all related words shown in the original languages •All references listed in biblical order •All words cross-referenced to spelling variations and variant forms •More than 2,000 key words from the KJV cross-referenced to their NIV equivalents •Special typefaces indicate the word or words used in the NIV translation for all Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek terms •Unique numbering system developed by Goodrick and Kohlenberger (G/K) eliminates the inherent gaps, flaws, and inaccuracies of the old Strong’s numbering system •Special indexes allow for easy cross-referencing between the G/K numbering system for those using reference books keyed to Strong’s numbers

Mr. Goodrick and Mr. Kohlen took the Strong's. claimed that there are inherent gaps, flaws, and inaccuracies of the old Strong’s numbering system and rewrote it to fit the NIV bible because before they created their concordance there wasn't a good bible dictionary to study from if you were reading from the NIV. So they are literally putting down one of the greatest Bible Dictionaries ever put together so they can sell a version of the bible that is so corrupted that the original Strong's can't be used to help a student of the Word of God do any research to better understand the Word of God.
You should get your facts straight before you post.

While Strong's is the standard concordance for the KJV, it is such for only the KJV because it is essentially a distillation of the KJV. It is inadequate for the NIV, the NASB, or any other modern translation, because it is not made for those translations. It's not a matter of "corruption" at all, but difference of word selection in English.

 

[Lightskin]

It is not the premise of the OP, nor myself, that the Holy Ghost ever was so (Straw man). The premise is about the errors (additions, deletions, etc) in the NIV, compared to the faithful and inspired word of God, preserved into the English, the KJB.

No strawman. Try again.

 

[Lightskin]

We must have the right words in order for the Holy Spirit to guide us to the truth. And yes, the Holy Spirit is bound by His word.

The Holy Spirit is bound by His word, not man’s translation of His word.

 

[John146]

While Strong's is the standard concordance for the KJV, it is such for only the KJV because it is essentially a distillation of the KJV. It is inadequate for the NIV, the NASB, or any other modern translation, because it is not made for those translations. It's not a matter of "corruption" at all, but difference of word selection in English.

Specific words matter to the Lord.

 

[John146]

The Holy Spirit is bound by His word, not man’s translation of His word.

Is God holding us accountable for living by His every word if He didn’t preserve every word for us today to live by? Do we get a pass?

 

[Lightskin]

Is God holding us accountable for living by His every word if He didn’t preserve every word for us today to live by? Do we get a pass?

The answer to your question is no, God does not hold us accountable for not living by His every word. People are held accountable for not believing in Jesus Christ. That’s Christianity 101.

 

[John146]

The answer to your question is no, God does not hold us accountable for not living by His every word. People are held accountable for not believing in Jesus Christ. That’s Christianity 101.

And that’s all? After we get saved, we are not to live by the word? Are we not to go on to full maturity? Well, Christianity 201 is the JSOC. Our obedience to His word will be made manifest.

 

[Dino246]

Specific words matter to the Lord.

Which is why the modern translators are so careful to get them right.

 

[Dino246]

It is not the premise of the OP, nor myself, that the Holy Ghost ever was so (Straw man). The premise is about the errors (additions, deletions, etc) in the NIV, compared to the faithful and inspired word of God, preserved into the English, the KJB.

Simply put, the KJV is not the standard; rather, the original-language manuscripts are. Your reasoning is circular and your conclusion is wrong.

According to the logic of your argument, it is valid to state that the KJV has many additions and deletions, compared to the NIV.

However, you're not the first to use bad arguments in favour of the KJV... which is why spotting them is so easy.

 

[Lightskin]

And that’s all? After we get saved, we are not to live by the word? Are we not to go on to full maturity? Well, Christianity 201 is the JSOC. Our obedience to His word will be made manifest.

You’re projecting. I did not say we are not to live by God‘s word, but I do say we are not held accountable for mistakes we make.

God knows our heart and He will not condemn us if we have been taught something incorrectly in a biblical translation.

 

[Lightskin]

Specific words matter to the Lord.

Which words?

 

[John146]

Which words?

Every word matters, not just the thought.

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Proverbs 14:15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.